RE: What happens if arf and kit building prices meet?
This is not gonna happen: On Tower Hobbies, the price of their Ultimate Bipe 40 is now $160.00: A $40.00 increase from $120.00. Their Christen Eagle ARF, comparable to the Ultimate Bipe, is priced at $200.00, only a $40.00 difference from the Ultimate Bipe kit. Since all the covering materials, glues, and accessories have to be purchased when completing the Ultimate kit, the cost of completion far exceeds that of the Christen Eagle ARF. In fact, you can purchase one ARF, and then buy a second ARF for spare parts for the cost of building just one kit. And another sad twist of fate: I have a friend who is into large scale. He has enough money to pay a professional to build his ARFs and kits, most of which are 1/4 to 1/2 scale. Some of his planes have multi-cylinder glow and gas engines. He recently told me that foamies and park flyers can be purchased cheaply, and will perform the same as his large models. Plus, there is no field required when a parking lot will do. His observation is this: Electric foamies are the wave of the future and kit building will become an obsolete skill. It's a tough reality indeed.
Posted on: 8/27/2012 11:26 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207848

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
The NPRM has been delayed yet again, until October. In my own humble opinion, the thought of the FAA ever coming up with a rule, is pure hogwash. And now the AMA is setting up to accept FPV, which I fully support, along with the private ownership of UAV's. I don't want the government to trample on my RIGHT to own a drone, any more than I would want them to take away our guns. Yes, the FAA can come up with a "rule", but it's not gonna have teeth. I'll believe all this, when I see it. NS
Posted on: 6/9/2012 9:16 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11112878

RE: dawning of the new days
Here's another one I picked up: http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/18/11755639-mysterious-object-nearly-downed-plane-over-denver?lite Sheriff said it could be a weather balloon. Could it have been one of his drones? NS
Posted on: 5/18/2012 7:51 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11086328

RE: The real reason for the FAA hassle
So, where's the beef? Are you all saying that you can't fly your model planes at the local field without a pilot's license and medical certificate? You guys are making all this out to be more than what it really is. Nothing will be any different for us when the FAA gets done with the new rules. The .40 sized trainers will still be flying, the jets will still be flying, the big gassers will still be flying, and you can still stick a camera on your electric foamy and have a ball. So, what has changed? Why be so anxious to sell that turbine, when there's really no need to, because nothing that is coming out is going to stop you from flying it? NS
Posted on: 4/30/2012 1:06 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11062878

RE: Regulation passed the House
I think the AMA is going to bat for the DIYDrones folks too: [quote]The Federal Aviation Administration's pending notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on unmanned aviation has been postponed yet again, this time to July, according to federal sources. AMA will in all likelihood oppose any federal regulations on aeromodeling, even if outside of AMA, a "community-based organization" that Congress has protected from such restrictions in the February FAA Reauthorization bill. Keep up to speed on this critical and complex subject by following Rich Hanson's government relations blog.[/quote] Go now, sin no more, and have fun with your quad copter and video downlink. Looks like we'll be all set. NS
Posted on: 4/5/2012 7:40 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11029227

RE: Regulation passed the House
Epoxy is right: The letter writing campaign didn't get underway until the Senate voted unanimously to protect aircraft modeling. If the DIY crowd wishes to start a CBO now, they can do just that, and still have all the tech gadgets they want, as long as it's not for commercial purposes and the model (and yes, you CAN model drones, too) stays within sight. I don't think they were ever a target of the FAA in the first place. The FAA is only after the commercial interests and law enforcement agencies who would profit from using their airspace, and I believe a lot of that will be aimed towards generating more revenue from taxes and licensing fees. The rest of us who go to the field and fly our toys, well, we just don't have the deep pockets. NS
Posted on: 2/26/2012 9:40 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10976648

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
Like Silent-AV8R said, the FAA is not interested in trying to regulate what they define as a model airplane. I am reasonably confident that the use of a community based organization will mitigate much of what modelers have to go through, compared to the real sUAS people having to jump the hoops to start their businesses. The default rout may make it inconvenient for some modelers, but I can also see the possibility of an altitude restriction being lifted as long as the club or organization can communicate their intention, just like my Tripoli prefecture did when I was flying high-powered rockets. We would get waivers that would last us for several days, and those were good for well over 30,000 feet! I guess I'm a little overly optimistic, but I also know that full-scale pilots don't want to see modelers lose their privilege. And I know for certain that the FAA doesn't want that either. NS
Posted on: 1/28/2012 11:34 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10933298

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R [quote]ORIGINAL: NorfolkSouthern Yes, that's for the sUAS guys. You know, the ones who fly something made by Northrop-Grumman, that weighs 300 pounds, with a video camera, a zillion miles out of the line of sight to sniff out drugs and illegal aliens. Something like that. But the notion sounds a bit silly for someone who goes to the field to play with their toy
Posted on: 1/23/2012 12:22 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10923519

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
[quote]ORIGINAL: GerKonig [quote]ORIGINAL: NorfolkSouthern [quote]ORIGINAL: chuckk2 Where to draw the line is the big question. Weight has long been one of the factors considered. Another is ''line of sight''. Altitude is another. I believe that 1500 AGL or so is a reasonable limit, not 400 AGL. After all even birds fly higher than 400 AGL. [b]Another area that I don't
Posted on: 1/23/2012 11:57 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10923466

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R [quote]ORIGINAL: NorfolkSouthern A medical certificate to fly a model plane? Where did you get that idea? [/quote] It is very likely according to what the commercial sUAS guys say and think that 2nd class FAA medicals will be required for most sUAS operations. I have not seen anything hinting that they will be required for models. [/quote] Yes, that's
Posted on: 1/22/2012 10:19 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10922643

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
[quote]ORIGINAL: chuckk2 Where to draw the line is the big question. Weight has long been one of the factors considered. Another is ''line of sight''. Altitude is another. I believe that 1500 AGL or so is a reasonable limit, not 400 AGL. After all even birds fly higher than 400 AGL. [b]Another area that I don't care for (even though I do hold a private pilot's license) is any requirement that a modeler/pilot carry any sort of license or medical certificate. Many of the RC modelers are older, and likely would not pass any FAA medical requirements for a certificate.[/b] (The devil is in the details, believe me!) [/quote] A medical certificate to fly a model plane? Where did you get that idea? How embarrassing it's gonna be for some folks when this thing finally unwinds. It's gonna be very hard to get most of us to stop laughing! NS
Posted on: 1/22/2012 9:57 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10922615

RE: Do you think the FAA should be sticking its nose into our hobby?
I have my doubts about a license requirement. Never in my life could I imagine it, for what is essentially considered a "toy" by many. I do, however, remember back in the day when RC required a certificate from the FCC. It was a simple application, and a fee. That was all that was required, then go flying. I don't remember flying fields where AMA membership was specified either, but quote me if I'm wrong. Back then, people would just take their .049 Cox to the local baseball diamond, and all the neighborhood kids would gather to watch. RC was something done out in the country, off of someone's farm. Nobody would even imagine the possibility of a license, simply because model airplanes were so benign. What harm can 10 pounds of balsa do? Part of the trouble with people today, is they want to put a motorcycle engine on a 90 pound behemoth. Or, they want a 600mph screaming jet. My hunch is: An altitude restriction will likely be imposed, unless there's clearance like they do in high-powered rocketry. The NAR and Tripoli can live with this, as they do launches on a routine basis without consequences, and in a safe manner. I used to launch rockets to over 3,500 feet during club meets, and had access to motors and propellents that until recently, were restricted by the BATFE. The FAA never winked or batted an eye. Like with the rocketry organizations, I'm sure the AMA can work around all this with few issues. NS
Posted on: 1/22/2012 12:33 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10921697

RE: motors, and ESC's, and batteries... OH MY!
Banana Hobby? I've read elsewhere on these forums that their customer service leaves quite a bit to be desired. You can surely find something better at Tower Hobby, that will give you the same thrill with better quality, from a company that stands behind their products. NS
Posted on: 1/20/2012 3:06 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10919063

RE: RC Plane Hobby Is Not Expensive !
[quote]ORIGINAL: Tarasdad How expensive this hobby is is directly related to how much you can afford to spend on it. For me it's expensive because I live on a fixed income (SSDI) and have subsequently low disposable income. I have to plan every expense, which limits what I can afford to do. On the other side of things I know folks who wouldn't hesitate for an instant before dropping $20,000 or more on a new jet. ''Expensive'' is far too relative a term for definitive declarations. [/quote] Most people will spend around $2,400.00 per year on a standard gas, glow, or electrics. You are always replacing batteries, and the stripped servo on occasion. An electric motor isn't going to last forever, and a gas piston will need repair some time down the road. My experience is that glow is the most affordable option for someone on a limited budget, and those would be in the .40 size, preferably an OS two-stroke. The only option that would cost less, would be a park flyer. Still, $2,400.00 per year is the same as my car payment. And my car can take me a lot more places than an RC plane, plus it'll get me and the plane to the field anyway. Might as well add your vehicle costs too, in that case. So, if you own a good running car free and clear, and are willing to stick to a park flyer (unless you have a large back yard or park that allows RC within walking distance), I would say $1,500.00 would be reasonable, and that would include AMA insurance and club membership with the transportation costs included. This hobby is not a good option for someone who doesn't have a job and a steady place to live. That's just the reality of it. NS
Posted on: 1/17/2012 8:29 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10914541

RE: Just received an email about video of upcoming rule info?
Well, this whole thing has been kicked clear into May, from what I've read. Maybe by then, they'll boot the sucker into the next year, and then next, and next, etc. Until, of course, they toss the poor chap clear into the next millennium. And even then, the turbines will still be flying along with everybody else, just the way it has been for over 50 years. But I still like the discussions, as this stuff really gives me something to do. Ain't this fun?? NS
Posted on: 1/15/2012 11:42 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10911019

RE: New Decathlons From Seagull 91 and 120 Size!
, but I will say that Decathlons are easier for me on the sim. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 1/14/2012 5:41 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10909049

RE: New Decathlons From Seagull 91 and 120 Size!
a while. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 1/11/2012 12:20 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10903761

RE: Getting kids involved in model aviation
just the harsh reality we live in. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 9/19/2011 10:10 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10725207

RE: Change within the AMA - what would you do different and why?
can tackle it before it reaches the the end zone! :D NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 6/5/2011 10:18 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10558903

RE: Beginner looking for a 1st trainer plane
of it first. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 5/28/2011 6:16 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10545658

RE: National Pilots Union Stance on UAS Regulation
of people who will ruin it for everybody else. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 4/25/2011 6:00 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10484792

RE: From my senator
After all this passes, things will be as they always have been. There are no regulations coming against toy airplanes, and I seriously doubt there would be, even if the bill didn't have that provision passed by the senate. Even with the amendment, all the FAA is going to do is laugh at it, because we were never a target in the first place.
Posted on: 4/21/2011 12:44 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10476858

RE: When a transaction goes bad?
If only I needed a chainsaw and he had one, Nitro Wing. Good heavens, I better not tell him I have a small rototiller!
Posted on: 4/13/2011 10:49 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10461688

When a transaction goes bad?
. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 4/13/2011 8:11 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10459706

RE: When a transaction goes bad?
Thanks for your thoughts. Taking this to a court would not be a good option, for the amount is so small I would most likely cost more to go that route anyway. And as others have said, reporting it could bring on some very serious repercussions. Add to the perils of a lost potential friendship. I will take the debt collector's point of view that something is better than nothing. I did manage to get a portion of the amount owed, and then hope that the rest can balance out later, perhaps. And if I get the full amount eventually, then it would be a win/win situation for both: Him getting a good deal on something he has been wanting, and my getting back most of what I originally paid, so I can start working on other projects. NS
Posted on: 4/13/2011 8:07 PM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10461494

RE: Congress votes
comes out. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 4/2/2011 7:56 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "AMA Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10438095

RE: Great Planes Stinger II .46 ARF announced!
The last of the Lanier Stinger ARFs (the 10 and the 40) had fiberglass cowls and wheel pants, plus a built-up turtle deck like the Great Planes featured here. So, the Stinger II is bound to have those features, plus a few tweaks to make the build easier. This is a Stinger 40 ARF with a new color scheme, essentially. I'm glad to see Hobbico bring it back. NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 3/26/2011 1:46 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10423403

RE: AMA sanctioned club looks to punish members
I'm just waiting for the padlock to show on this thread. Can anybody take a guess of when they'll finally lock, and be done with it? NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 3/17/2011 2:10 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10405360

RE: what 3d plane for beginner
Yes, it's true that 3D planes have light wing-loading, and can fly very slowly. They are indeed easier to fly than a trainer, for someone who has already learned the basics of controlling the model. Those good traits, however, are overshadowed by the 3D's maneuverability. While stall characteristics are almost non-existent, to the point where it is nearly impossible to tip-stall, there is still the tendency of a beginner to over-control the plane. And, the maneuverability of something that's 3D capable is a bit extreme, for the most part, with NO self-correcting capability. If a 3D plane is to be used as a trainer, I would recommend the following: First, get a buddy box and a competent instructor. Center of Gravity should be forward, have 3/4 full throws dialed in, and also use 45% expo on a computerized radio. This will still allow necessary maneuvers for most aerobatics and to cover the basic necessities (landing, takeoff, level flight, etc), while reducing the sensitivity just enough to make it flyable by someone who is inexperienced, AS LONG AS they are with an instructor. And finally: I am adamant about about the instructor. Don't go it alone on a Twist if you haven't flown before. NS
Posted on: 3/12/2011 11:45 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10395488

RE: Old Christen Eagle II ARF....Need Help!
!!!! In all seriousness again.....THANKS! [/quote] I love this post! Do a video! NorfolkSouthern
Posted on: 3/5/2011 12:21 AM by Author "NorfolkSouthern" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10379868